FALL RIVER — Under Massachusetts’ school accountability rating system, a school can be designated any level from 1 through 5.

Those levels are based primarily on student test-taking data — the last four years of scores from the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment Systems test.

A Level 1 designation is the highest rating. It signifies that students are achieving academically, and that gaps in achievement between subgroups of students are small. Level 2 means that, overall, a school’s students are achieving academically, but there are more significant achievement gaps. A Level 3 designation indicates a school ranks among the lowest 20 percent of schools statewide, with Level 4 schools considered the most underperforming of that group.

A Level 5 designation means a school is chronically underperforming based on MCAS history and eligible for a state takeover.

When a school is designated as Level 4, state law mandates that school districts convene local stakeholder groups and devise three-year turnaround plans. The designation also means schools become eligible to receive state and federal funding toward those turnaround plans.

According to DESE, the department “is committed to only naming a number of schools for which it can provide meaningful assistance.”

By law, the state can have no more than 4 percent of all schools statewide designated levels 4 or 5 in a given year, according to DESE.

As it stands, Level 3 schools, even those on the cusp of becoming Level 4, are not eligible to receive state or federal school turnaround funds.

It’s something that state advocates for education reform had been lobbying lawmakers to change.

A bill that would have enabled Level 3 schools to get resources under a “challenge” school designation was defeated on the floor of the Massachusetts state Senate recently; it was written into a bill that also would have lifted the state’s cap on charter schools.

That bill would have given Mitchell Chester, the commissioner of the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, the authority to designate a certain number of Level 3 schools as “challenge” schools, enabling districts to develop turnaround plans for those schools, a process similar to that followed by newly designated Level 4 schools.

Jason Williams — a Fall River native who now serves as executive director of the Boston-based Massachusetts office of the advocacy group Stand For Children — is among those who had advocated for state lawmakers to consider extending Level 4 school assistance and resources to Level 3 schools.

“Why would we, knowing what works, wait till when schools are failing?” Williams said prior to the vote.

Williams said those schools need flexibility “to think about the best set of tools help them think forward.”

“The right approach in dealing with our children is to be able to extend the ability to school leaders and educators on the ground to determine what the right set of tools are,” Williams said.

Page 2 of 2 - Even without the influx of additional resources, some schools do get promoted from Level 3 status. According to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, last year, of the 285 schools statewide that as of 2012 had been designated as Level 3, 23 rose to Level 2 designation, and 16 rose to Level 1.

Still, in 2013, the number of Level 3 schools grew to 299, as other schools were newly identified as Level 3.

Sen. Michael Rodrigues, D-Fall River, who voted for the bill’s passage said he was disappointed by the outcome.

He said there’s a “pent-up demand” for more charter schools in the state, with “thousands of children on waiting lists.”

“It’s unfair for those students and parents,” he said.

He said Fall River schools are examples that show when schools are given resources and tools they “make the improvement.”

“You’re seeing improvement in all of the schools,” acknowledging the bill’s two components might be written into two separate bills in the next legislative session.

In the mean time, advocates like Williams say they will continue to push for giving struggling schools more autonomy.

“What we’re trying to do is remove barriers so our educators can do what’s needed to move our children forward,” Williams said. That includes having “a strong plan in place and strong leadership."

“From our perspective, what’s really important is, ultimately, how can we build upon many of the successes that we’ve seen, that have helped Massachusetts to be No. 1?" Williams said. "We shouldn’t rest on our laurels. We need continue to replicate and expand.”